Terror and Terrorism
an editorial
The slaughter of over 5,000 people in the destruction of the World Trade Centre and of a wing of the Pentagon has been repeatedly described over the past week as an act of terrorism. We believe that it is simply an act of terror.
Terrorism refers to the use of terror to achieve some end, usually political. While many still cling to the belief that the attacks have something to do with political objectives, so far no one has demanded any political concessions in return for promising not to attack again. The attacks of September 11 have achieved no political objective, and as far as we can see they have achieved no military objective either. In fact, they seem to have improved the position of the United States, as unfriendly governments offer to co-operate in finding the instigators of the attacks.
It appears that some members of the terrorist community may have used their insiders' knowledge to short stocks. The amount they could make, however, from such a coup would probably not cover the costs of the operation. If a market coup has been attempted, it probably is just an effort to recover part of the costs.
There is also the possibility that the goal of the attacks was simply to harm the American economy. This goal only seems plausible, however, if more attacks are planned to force the American economy into collapse. The problem with that idea is that the attackers know that before the American economy collapsed the Americans would have several opportunities to try to prevent that disaster by using very powerful nuclear weapons against lands dear to the attackers' hearts.
In the end, the attacks seem to have been motivated not by considerations of politics or economics, but purely and simply by cruelty and bloodlust. Politics or religion may have provided a rationalization, but the true goal of the attacks seems to have been to kill people, lots of people, Americans and non-Americans, non-Muslims and Muslims, supporters of Israel and opponents of Israel, and to kill them in pain, in horror, and in great numbers. Obviously the money spent on the operation could have been more effectively used in peaceful ways to oppose American policy; in fact, it could have been used in more effective military ways. Instead it was used to kill spectacularly.
If cruelty and bloodlust were the motivation for the attacks, we can expect to see more attempts. L'appétit vient en mangeant, as other serial killers have discovered. Trying to guess what political concessions might win a reprieve from whoever it was who instigated these attacks is a mug's game, as is trying inflict a punishment to fit the crime. The danger will be removed only when the instigators are, at the very least, neutralized and the means of carrying out such operations are no longer available.
Terror and Terrorism © Coolth, 2001
Click the banner or click here for Coolth
Commentary | Home